413 research outputs found
Peer-review in a world with rational scientists: Toward selection of the average
One of the virtues of peer review is that it provides a self-regulating
selection mechanism for scientific work, papers and projects. Peer review as a
selection mechanism is hard to evaluate in terms of its efficiency. Serious
efforts to understand its strengths and weaknesses have not yet lead to clear
answers. In theory peer review works if the involved parties (editors and
referees) conform to a set of requirements, such as love for high quality
science, objectiveness, and absence of biases, nepotism, friend and clique
networks, selfishness, etc. If these requirements are violated, what is the
effect on the selection of high quality work? We study this question with a
simple agent based model. In particular we are interested in the effects of
rational referees, who might not have any incentive to see high quality work
other than their own published or promoted. We find that a small fraction of
incorrect (selfish or rational) referees can drastically reduce the quality of
the published (accepted) scientific standard. We quantify the fraction for
which peer review will no longer select better than pure chance. Decline of
quality of accepted scientific work is shown as a function of the fraction of
rational and unqualified referees. We show how a simple quality-increasing
policy of e.g. a journal can lead to a loss in overall scientific quality, and
how mutual support-networks of authors and referees deteriorate the system.Comment: 5 pages 4 figure
Surveys of current status in biomedical science grant review: funding organisations' and grant reviewers' perspectives
O sincretismo do processo civil brasileiro: uma análise da viabilidade de um sistema processual único e multifuncional
O Sincretismo do Processo Civil Brasileiro é uma análise da viabilidade de um sistema processual único e multifuncional, em contraposição à sua clássica repartição em espécies, ditas autônomas. Nega a realidade jurídica da autonomia dos “processos” de conhecimento, execução e cautelar, reconhecendo a inevitável alonomia entre eles. Constrói, assim, a idéia de um sistema processual único e composto das funções de conhecimento, execução e cognição sumária urgente
Can the Relationship between Doctors and Drug Companies Ever Be a Healthy One?
Emma D'Arcy and Ray Moynihan debate whether doctors and drug companies can form healthy alliances or whether these will always be prone to the corrupting influence of drug company money
Effect of atorvastatin on glycaemia progression in patients with diabetes:an analysis from the Collaborative Atorvastatin in Diabetes Trial (CARDS)
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: In an individual-level analysis we examined the effect of atorvastatin on glycaemia progression in type 2 diabetes and whether glycaemia effects reduce the prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) with atorvastatin. METHODS: The study population comprised 2,739 people taking part in the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS) who were randomised to receive atorvastatin 10 mg or placebo and who had post-randomisation HbA(1c) data. This secondary analysis used Cox regression to estimate the effect of atorvastatin on glycaemia progression, defined as an increase in HbA(1c) of ≥0.5% (5.5 mmol/mol) or intensification of diabetes therapy. Mixed models were used to estimate the effect of atorvastatin on HbA(1c) as a continuous endpoint. RESULTS: Glycaemia progression occurred in 73.6% of participants allocated placebo and 78.1% of those allocated atorvastatin (HR 1.18 [95% CI 1.08, 1.29], p < 0.001) by the end of follow-up. The HR was 1.22 (95% CI 1.19, 1.35) in men and 1.11 (95% CI 0.95, 1.29) in women (p = 0.098 for the sex interaction). A similar effect was seen in on-treatment analyses: HR 1.20 (95% CI 1.07, 1.35), p = 0.001. The net mean treatment effect on HbA(1c) was 0.14% (95% CI 0.08, 0.21) (1.5 mmol/mol). The effect did not increase through time. Diabetes treatment intensification alone did not differ with statin allocation. Neither baseline nor 1-year-attained HbA(1c) predicted subsequent CVD, and the atorvastatin effect on CVD did not vary by HbA(1c) change (interaction p value 0.229). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The effect of atorvastatin 10 mg on glycaemia progression among those with diabetes is statistically significant but very small, is not significantly different between sexes, does not increase with duration of statin and does not have an impact on the magnitude of CVD risk reduction with atorvastatin. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00125-015-3802-6) contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material, which is available to authorised users
Reviewing the review:a qualitative assessment of the peer review process in surgical journals
Abstract Background Despite rapid growth of the scientific literature, no consensus guidelines have emerged to define the optimal criteria for editors to grade submitted manuscripts. The purpose of this project was to assess the peer reviewer metrics currently used in the surgical literature to evaluate original manuscript submissions. Methods Manuscript grading forms for 14 of the highest circulation general surgery-related journals were evaluated for content, including the type and number of quantitative and qualitative questions asked of peer reviewers. Reviewer grading forms for the seven surgical journals with the higher impact factors were compared to the seven surgical journals with lower impact factors using Fisher’s exact tests. Results Impact factors of the studied journals ranged from 1.73 to 8.57, with a median impact factor of 4.26 in the higher group and 2.81 in the lower group. The content of the grading forms was found to vary considerably. Relatively few journals asked reviewers to grade specific components of a manuscript. Higher impact factor journal manuscript grading forms more frequently addressed statistical analysis, ethical considerations, and conflict of interest. In contrast, lower impact factor journals more commonly requested reviewers to make qualitative assessments of novelty/originality, scientific validity, and scientific importance. Conclusion Substantial variation exists in the grading criteria used to evaluate original manuscripts submitted to the surgical literature for peer review, with differential emphasis placed on certain criteria correlated to journal impact factors
Barriers and opportunities for evidence-based health service planning: the example of developing a Decision Analytic Model to plan services for sexually transmitted infections in the UK
Decision Analytic Models (DAMs) are established means of evidence-synthesis to differentiate between health interventions. They have mainly been used to inform clinical decisions and health technology assessment at the national level, yet could also inform local health service planning. For this, a DAM must take into account the needs of the local population, but also the needs of those planning its services. Drawing on our experiences from stakeholder consultations, where we presented the potential utility of a DAM for planning local health services for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in the UK, and the evidence it could use to inform decisions regarding different combinations of service provision, in terms of their costs, cost-effectiveness, and public health outcomes, we discuss the barriers perceived by stakeholders to the use of DAMs to inform service planning for local populations, including (1) a tension between individual and population perspectives; (2) reductionism; and (3) a lack of transparency regarding models, their assumptions, and the motivations of those generating models
Survey of knowledge and perception on the access to evidence-based practice and clinical practice change among maternal and infant health practitioners in South East Asia
Background Evidence-based practice (EBP) can provide appropriate care for women and their babies; however implementation of EBP requires health professionals to have access to knowledge, the ability to interpret health care information and then strategies to apply care. The aim of this survey was to assess current knowledge of evidence-based practice, information seeking practices, perceptions and potential enablers and barriers to clinical practice change among maternal and infant health practitioners in South East Asia. Methods Questionnaires about IT access for health information and evidence-based practice were administered during August to December 2005 to health care professionals working at the nine hospitals participating in the South East Asia Optimising Reproductive and Child Health in Developing countries (SEA-ORCHID) project in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and The Philippines. Results The survey was completed by 660 staff from six health professional groups. Overall, easy IT access for health care information was available to 46% of participants. However, over a fifth reported no IT access was available and over half of nurses and midwives never used IT health information. Evidence-based practice had been heard of by 58% but the majority did not understand the concept. The most frequent sites accessed were Google and PubMed. The Cochrane Library had been heard of by 47% of whom 51% had access although the majority did not use it or used it less than monthly. Only 27% had heard of the WHO Reproductive Health Library and 35% had been involved in a clinical practice change and were able to identify enablers and barriers to change. Only a third of participants had been actively involved in practice change with wide variation between the countries. Willingness to participate in professional development workshops on evidence-based practice was high. Conclusion This survey has identified the need to improve IT access to health care information and health professionals' knowledge of evidence-based health care to assist in employing evidence base practice effectively.Ruth Martis, Jacqueline J Ho and Caroline A Crowther for The SEA-ORCHID Study Grou
- …